More than 200 people gathered on the Westford Common Thursday, May 16th to support life and oppose proposed changes to the state’s abortion law.

House Bill 3320 and Senate Bill 1209 would expand abortions beyond 24 weeks gestation up until and even after birth. Babies born alive would be subject to legalized infanticide in the event a baby survived an abortion attempt.

Participants in the rally opposed several other provisions in the bills. The proposed bills would eliminate requirements that late-term abortions be performed in a hospital by a physician. They would expand taxpayer funding of abortion. And, the bills would eliminate the requirement that a girl age 17 or younger have the consent of a parent, guardian or judge.

The rally, organized by Westford resident and Westford Republican Town Committee Chair, Kathy Lynch, included collaboration from area churches, pro-life organizations, and civics organizations. Lynch said, “Sadly, many are unaware of the provisions in these bills or choose to turn a blind eye to them. As people learn the truth, they are horrified. This rally allowed participants to show their opposition in a peaceful manner.”

The wife of MA Republican Party Chair, Bernadette Lyons, Republican State Committeewoman, Debbie Dugan, and C. J. Williams of Massachusetts Citizens for Life were among the speakers. Republicans came out in high numbers. People of all faiths, color, creed and political persuasion were invited to attend. C.J. Williams urged the crowd to contact their State Senators and Representatives to vote against these “anti-woman, anti-girl” bills. Westford State Representative, Jim Arciero, is a co-sponsor of House Bill 3320.

BOSTON — Include Massachusetts Republican Party Chairman Jim Lyons as among those who cheered the decision by U.S. Attorney Andrew Lelling to charge a local judge with obstruction and perjury after she allegedly helped a criminal illegal alien avoid a third deportation.

“Finally, we have someone committed to putting the safety of our citizens ahead of identity politics,” Lyons said about Lelling.

“The allegations in today’s indictment involve obstruction by a sitting judge, that is intentional interference with the enforcement of federal law, and that is a crime,” Lelling said. “We cannot pick and choose the federal laws we follow, or use our personal views to justify violating the law.”

Democrats, including Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey, appeared shaken by Lelling’s comments.

“Today’s indictment is a radical and politically-motivated attack on our state and the independence of our courts,” Healey said in a statement.

Lyons offered a simple question for Healey.

“A Democrat judge gets caught red-handed aiding and abetting an illegal immigrant who is already in court to face drug-dealing charges, perjures herself, and Democrat Maura Healey’s first reaction is to call it a politically-motivated attack,” Lyons said. “Who does the attorney general honestly think she works for?

“Does the state’s top prosecutor think she answers to the Democratic Party or to the law-abiding taxpayers she is assigned to protect?”

U.S. Rep. Joseph Kennedy III said Lelling’s decision “threatens the safety of our community” while a spokesman for U.S. Sen. Ed Markey called it “an unwarranted intrusion by the Trump Justice Department into Massachusetts state affairs.”

Their comments did not surprise Lyons.

“It’s finally time for people in positions of power to recognize there are not two sets of laws,” Lyons said. “U.S. District Attorney Lelling understands this, and it is time for the Radical Democrats to understand the rule of law matters.

A bill currently before the state Legislature fails the feeblest standard for a decent and humane society.

The bill, S.1209 in the Senate and H.3320 in the House, rejects any pretense of offering the most basic humanitarian assistance to fully-developed, fully-born, babies.

Under the radical infanticide bill, absolutely nothing would be done to protect or even comfort a baby who survives a late-term abortion.

In addition, the extreme infanticide bill removes all practical limitations on aborting unborn babies. These abortions are frequently referred to as late-term or partial-birth abortions.

Another radical measure in the bill eliminates family communication. Teenage children are conferred with complete autonomy in the realm of abortion. Instead, a child ages 12 through 17, or any age, would be permitted to have an abortion, without ever discussing the options with a parent, loved one, or family member.

Everything is done in secrecy. Even the payment to the abortionist would be made with taxpayer funds without parental consultation or consent.

Can it really be that a decision by someone under 18 to have an abortion is less significant or traumatizing than smoking a cigarette, drinking a beer, or visiting a tanning salon?

Have we really come to this?

Let’s not go down this extreme and dangerous path. Let’s follow a higher road and join together to protect, rather than reject, the least of those among us.

A bill currently before the state Legislature seeking to transform Massachusetts into a “sanctuary state” proves beyond a doubt the Radical Left’s disdain for American sovereignty, and especially the rule of law.

Here’s why: The Unsafe Communities Act would protect those who have already broken the law by crossing our borders illegally. They already have a sense that they can get away with defying the same laws American citizens must obey.

If you’re a citizen traveling abroad, just try to get back into this country without your passport or papers.

No matter what you say, you will not be permitted to simply waltz across the border.

Even as an American citizen, you’ll be detained until absolute proof of your identity is established.

So why do leftist Democrats want to grant special rights for foreign citizens who refuse to follow rules that every American must follow?

Rather than increasing respect for our laws, the Unsafe Act will diminish any sense that newcomers must obey our legal system.

The same policies promoted at the state level by leftist Democrats under the Unsafe Communities Act have already affected a least one victim: a disabled, elderly woman. According to reports, the wheelchair-bound victim in was viciously attacked in October 2017 as part of a $2,000 strong-arm robbery captured on video in Boston — which claimed “sanctuary city” status in 2014 — at the Charles River Plaza Bank of America kiosk.

Who attacked this innocent person?

An illegal immigrant who would be granted additional protections through the Unsafe Communities Act.

In this case, the state Supreme Judicial Court allowed Sreynuon Lunn, an illegal immigrant from Cambodia who had been arraigned a year prior on a previous robbery charge, to remain free in Massachusetts.

The SJC handed down that ruling in July 2017. Their reasoning?

“Massachusetts law provides no authority for Massachusetts court officers to arrest and hold an individual solely on the basis of a Federal civil immigration detainer, beyond the time that the individual would otherwise be entitled to be released from State custody.”

The state’s previous charges against Lunn stem from his alleged October 2017 robbery of another homeless man on Boston’s Canal Street. Following the SJC ruling, federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials were subsequently barred from working with local law enforcement, and Lunn was allowed to walk.

Fast-forward just three months and Lunn, who should have been sent back home to his native Cambodia, is emboldened and back at it again.

This time, his target was an elderly woman.

I don’t know about the liberal Democrats, but I do know that Republicans want to make our communities safer for people like her.

We want safe communities for those who respect and follow our laws.

The Unsafe Communities Act protects the wrong people. It will grant additional rights to lawbreakers like Lunn, who first defy laws regulating entry into the United States — and then prey upon innocent victims.

Let’s make it clear to the far-left that we’re above their virtue signaling and angling for cheap political points.

BOSTON – The U.S. Department of Justice has announced that following an exhaustive probe spanning two years, Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his team of investigators have found no evidence of collusion between President Donald Trump’s winning 2016 campaign and Russia.

Mueller also confirmed he found no evidence of justice obstruction committed by President Trump.

Massachusetts Republican Party Chairman Jim Lyons:

“This two-year investigation has cost taxpayers $25 million, and the result is that there was no collusion or obstruction going on at all. Maybe it’s time to investigate those responsible for ginning up hysteria, and those responsible for triggering this witch hunt.”

Article VIII, on this year’s annual town meeting warrant, proposes that an “enterprise account” be established to fund new federal and state mandates related to storm water management. Proponents say the fund will support needed infrastructure improvements, that if ignored could invoke the wrath of some formidable federal and state agencies. However, things appear to have been satisfactory to date. No specific actions against the town are pending or anticipated. Efforts are also being made on Beacon Hill to obtain funding for cities and towns to meet the cost of these upgrades through state tax revenues.

More significantly, Article VIIl raises questions about taxation without representation. The measure would delegate, to the Board of Selectmen, the right to determine one of two methods for sustaining the fund. One method would levy a fee on all property owners, charging them for the total square footage of any roofs or hardtop on their property. A minimum unit value has been developed, along with a three tiered fee system, to be allocated based upon the amount of impervious surface at a particular property. The other method would be a property tax override, which would levy the amount needed through a broad based property tax increase. What’s the difference?

This is a classic example of a distinction without a difference. Do not be fooled by the term “fee”. The fee is compulsory, hence it is a tax. Everyone needs a roof. Because it is based on property, the town should follow the law. Town meeting and the voters should approve tax policy, not the Board of Selectmen. Article VIII would change this. By approving the enterprise fund, the Board of Selectmen would be authorized to decide whether funding should come through a fee, or an override. If they were to adopt the fee, they would have sole authority to set the rates. This would give them administrative tax authority, a significant deviation from the principle that such authority rests solely with the people.

Money taken in by fees, could also free revenue encumbered by the town’s current commitment to storm-water upgrades and maintenance for allocation to other budget accounts. This would be, in effect, a backdoor override. Vote no on Article VIII. Let the proponents come back with a front door override proposal, and let the voters decide.

Newly elected Chair of the Massachusetts Republican State Committee, Jim Lyons, was interviewed on Westford Community Cable Television last week by Kathy Lynch, Chair of the Westford Republican Town Committee. Lyons was a featured guest on the program “Second Opinion,” which is sponsored by the Committee. Lyons fielded some very direct questions about the state of the current MassGOP and his plans to improve its effectiveness. Among the topics discussed was the relationship between the State Committee and the Baker Administration. Lyons left no doubt as to the direction he believes the Committee must go, and that is to “elect more Republicans to the Massachusetts State Legislature.”

BOSTON – Early this morning, after trying to reclaim a place in the Republican Party, former Massachusetts Governor Bill Weld announced a grandstanding political gambit that reeks of political opportunism. His self-seeking ploy to divide Republicans will fail.

“Weld is the same ex-Republican who deserted Massachusetts for New York; who endorsed President Barack Obama over Senator John McCain for President; who renounced the GOP for the Libertarian Party; who ran against the Trump-Pence Republican ticket in 2016, while cozying up to Democrat Hillary Clinton,” said MassGOP Chairman Jim Lyons. ” After abandoning Republicans, Democrats, and Libertarians, Weld demands that faithful Republicans consider him as their standard bearer. Even Benedict Arnold switched allegiances less often! We Republicans will put partisanship aside, reach across the aisle to Democrats, and Libertarians, and reject Bill Weld.”

That is what RINO Gov. Charlie Baker should have written to new conservative Republican Party boss Jim Lyons.

It would have been appropriate since Baker, a lifelong Republican with liberal tendencies, appears more comfortable these days as a would-be Democrat than as a member of a party that has been taken over by conservative Donald Trump supporters.

Baker can be counted on as one of the original critics of the president, beginning even before the 2016 New Hampshire GOP primary and continuing to today.

Baker knows that he owes his re-election victory over Democrat Jay Gonzalez to Democrats and Independents, not to the declining number of Republicans still voting in the state.

Now that he is into his second, and probably last, term as governor, he needs support from the conservatives now running the state committee like he needs a hole in the head.

It is only through compromise and conciliation with Democrats on Beacon Hill — who hold overwhelming liberal majorities in both the House and Senate — that Baker has been able to succeed as chief executive.